ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2022
Is YouTube a high-quality source of information on cancer rehabilitation?
Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality of Cancer-Related Information on New Media (2014-2023): Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- The quality and reliability of short videos about muscle strain on Bilibili and TikTok: Cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Developing critical thinking and decision-making skills for cancer information: the Informed Health Choice-Cancer online learning resource.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- How reliable is youtube as a platform for cochlear implant information?Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- YouTube videos on nutrition and pediatric cancer: scientific reliability and quality.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- How useful are YouTube videos on labial frenectomy? A quality review.BMC oral health · 2025Review
- Educational quality of YouTube videos on scapular dyskinesis: a cross-sectional analysis.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2025Article
- Evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of the Informed Health Choices-Cancer programme: A pilot randomised trial protocol.PloS one · 2025Article
- Quality of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Videos Available on TikTok and Bilibili: Content Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Assessing the Quality and Reliability of Cardiac Rehabilitation Information on YouTube: A Systematic Evaluation.Cureus · 2024Article
- AI-Enhanced evaluation of YouTube content on post-surgical incontinence following pelvic cancer treatment.SSM - population health · 2024Article
- Tumor Immunotherapy-Related Information on Internet-Based Videos Commonly Used by the Chinese Population: Content Quality Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Assessing the Quality of YouTube's Incontinence Information after Cancer Surgery: An Innovative Graphical Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Bilibili, TikTok, and YouTube as sources of information on gastric cancer: assessment and analysis of the content and quality.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Quality and Comprehensiveness of YouTube Videos Discussing Pancreatic Cancer.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Assessment of Lung Cancer YouTube Videos for Patient Education.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Status quo of the public's knowledge of probiotics based on video-sharing platforms.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Cluster headache - The worst possible pain on YouTube.Headache · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSearching for information on the Internet, especially YouTube
methodsYouTube search was performed on February 26th, 2021, with two keyword sets: "cancer rehabilitation" and "oncology rehabilitation." The modified DISCERN, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) scoring system, and the Global Quality Score (GQS) were used to evaluate the quality and reliability of the videos. The features of each video such as the number of likes, dislikes, and views, upload date, duration, like ratio, and the uploader profile were also collected.
resultsFifty-three of the first 200 videos shown in the search results met the criteria. Most of the videos were low quality. The most common uploader profile was academic institute/university hospital. The three most common subjects in the videos were CR definition, physical therapy and occupational therapy, and patient experiences. The mean modified DISCERN, JAMA, and GQS scores were 2.14, 2.03, and 2.78, respectively. Higher quality videos had longer duration, greater number of views, and better reliability scores.
conclusionThe results showed that most of the rated videos were of low-quality and didn't provide sufficient information on the topic discussed. Higher-quality and more accurate YouTube videos are needed to increase awareness of CR. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: For cancer survivors, CR-related YouTube video content often provides information of low reliability. In this context, it is necessary to focus on the production of video content that includes clinical guides, references, and are based on clinical-based practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34347245What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.